{"id":620,"date":"2021-05-27T12:28:20","date_gmt":"2021-05-27T10:28:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/world-heritage-watch.org\/content\/?page_id=620"},"modified":"2021-07-31T18:54:55","modified_gmt":"2021-07-31T16:54:55","slug":"stonehenge-alliance","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/world-heritage-watch.org\/content\/stonehenge-alliance\/","title":{"rendered":"Stonehenge Alliance"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n
\n

High Court Judgement AGAINST A303 Stonehenge scheme!<\/strong><\/h2><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Save Stonehenge World Heritage Site Ltd., the legal representative of the Stonehenge Alliance issued this press release on Friday 30 July:<\/strong><\/strong><\/p><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Save Stonehenge World Heritage Site is delighted the High Court has today held that Transport Secretary Grant Shapps acted unlawfully when granting permission for a dual carriageway and short tunnel through the Stonehenge World Heritage Site (WHS)[2].

The judge found that the Secretary of State unlawfully failed to consider less damaging ways of relieving the existing A303. UNESCO\u2019s World Heritage Committee and others have repeatedly called for a longer tunnel so as to protect the whole of the WHS. Just days before the judgment UNESCO\u2019s Committee warned that if the shorter tunnel goes ahead, then Stonehenge might be placed on the List of World Heritage in Danger next year.[3]

As part of his judgement, Mr Justice Holgate noted the Transport Secretary\u2019s acceptance that the road scheme would have caused permanent and irreversible harm to the WHS.

We are enormously grateful to our legal team[4] for their work on the case. We also acknowledge the brilliant work of the Stonehenge Alliance[5] and the hundreds of thousands of individuals worldwide who have, over many years, passionately supported the campaign to protect our internationally famous WHS.[6] We are especially indebted to over 3,000 individuals who have helped to fund the legal action to date.[7]

John Adams, OBE, SSWHS Director and Acting Chairman of the Stonehenge Alliance, said:

\u201cWe could not be more pleased about the outcome of the legal challenge. The Stonehenge Alliance has campaigned from the start for a longer tunnel if a tunnel should be considered necessary. Ideally, such a tunnel would begin and end outside the WHS. But now that we are facing a climate emergency, it is all the more important that this ruling should be a wake-up call for the Government. It should look again at its roads programme and take action to reduce road traffic and eliminate any need to build new and wider roads that threaten the environment as well as our cultural heritage.\u201d<\/em>

SSWHS awaits the Secretary of State\u2019s decision on whether he will appeal against the judgement. Should he do so, the legal battle will continue to save the Stonehenge landscape for future generations to marvel at and enjoy.

Notes:<\/strong>
[1] SSWHS is a limited company formed by individual Stonehenge Alliance supporters to legally challenge the Transport Secretary\u2019s decision to grant the DCO.
[2] Transport Secretary\u2019s Decision Letter, 12.11.20; High Court Judgement: CO\/4844\/2020 The Queen on the application of Save Stonehenge World Heritage Site Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport, 30.7.21.
[3] Committee\u2019s Draft Decision: 44 COM 7B.61, pp. 62-3; approved unaltered 22.7.21.
[4] SSWHS is represented by Rowan Smith of Leigh Day LLP, Solicitors (media enquiries 07775 713725), David Wolfe QC of Matrix Chambers and Victoria Hutton of 39 Essex Chambers.
[5] The Alliance is supported by: Ancient Sacred Landscape Network; Campaign to Protect Rural England; Friends of the Earth; Rescue, The British Archaeological Trust; Transport Action Network; and many individuals worldwide.
[6] https:\/\/stonehengealliance.org.uk\/our-campaign\/petition\/<\/span><\/a>.
[7] https:\/\/www.crowdjustice.com\/case\/save-stonehenge-world-heritage-site\/<\/span><\/a>.<\/p><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

<\/i>https:\/\/stonehengealliance.org.uk<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/div><\/div><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div><\/section>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"template-gutentor-full-width.php","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-620","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/world-heritage-watch.org\/content\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/620","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/world-heritage-watch.org\/content\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/world-heritage-watch.org\/content\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/world-heritage-watch.org\/content\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/world-heritage-watch.org\/content\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=620"}],"version-history":[{"count":11,"href":"https:\/\/world-heritage-watch.org\/content\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/620\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1275,"href":"https:\/\/world-heritage-watch.org\/content\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/620\/revisions\/1275"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/world-heritage-watch.org\/content\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=620"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}